KADIR HAS UNIVERSITY
GRADUATE SCHOOL OF SOCIAL SCIENCES
THE ASSESSMENT OF TURKEY AS A SOFT POWER:
2009-2014
GRADUATE THESIS
GÜL ORAL
Gül Or al M.A The sis 2016 Stu d ent’s Fu ll Na m e P h .D. (o r M .S . o r M .A .) The sis 20 11
THE ASSESSMENT OF TURKEY AS A SOFT POWER:
2009-2014
GÜL ORAL
Submitted to the Graduate School of Social Sciences in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
Master of Arts in
INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
KADIR HAS UNIVERSITY June, 2016
vii Table of Contents Abstract ix Özet xi Acknowledgements xiv List of Tables xv
List of Abbreviations xvi
1. Introduction 1
2. Theoretical Review 6
2.1 Power………...6
2.2 Hard Power and Soft Power………... 14
2.2.2 Soft Power………..………..17
2.2.3 Sources of Soft Power………..20
2.2.4 The Critiques of Soft Power………...…..23
3. Soft Power in Turkish Foreign Policy 28
3.1 Theoretical Discussion………. 28
3.2 Different Perspectives about the Concept of Soft Power in Turkish Foreign Policy………….. ………..32
viii
4. The Practices of Soft Power in Turkish Foreign Policy 49
4.1 Culture ………..……….50
4.2 Values…………... ……….56
4.3 Policies.. ……….... 59
4.4 Economy…………....……….66
4.5.The Institutionalization of Turkish Soft Power………..68
4.6. The Assessment of Practical Aspect of Soft Power ……….……71
5. Conclusion 81
References 89
Appendix A – Types of Scholarships 104
ix
ABSTRACT
THE ASSESSMENT OF TURKEY AS A SOFT POWER: 2009-2014
Gül Oral
Master of Social Sciences in International Relations
Advisor: Associate Professor Dimitrios Triantaphyllou
June, 2016
Soft power has been an influential concept in the field of international relations since it was developed by Joseph Jr. Nye in the 1990s. Even though the term was coined in order to assess American power in terms of its soft power resources such as values, culture, and policies, it has been extensively used by politicians and scholars in different countries. The concept has also come into prominence in Turkey during the JDP period by highlighting a new foreign policy approach presented by Ahmet Davutoğlu based on his Strategic Depth doctrine. Turkey has been evaluated as a rising soft power which can play an active role in the regional and global arena due to its various soft power
resources such as its culture, values, foreign policy, and economic success. The thesis aims at analyzing Turkey’s soft power between 2009-2014 when Davutoğlu served as the Minister of Foreign Affairs by creating an analytical framework based on its soft power resources and practices. The main research question arises as: “whether Turkey
x
has achieved to enhance its soft power during the 2009-2014 period as asserted?” The foremost argument of this study could be expressed as follows: though Turkey has had a substantial amount of soft power owing to its diverse resources, its soft power seems to be diminishing due to its lack of success in promoting universal values in its domestic and foreign policy.
Keywords: Joseph Jr. Nye, Soft Power, Turkey, Justice and Development Party,
Ahmet Davutoğlu, the Strategic Depth doctrine
xi
ÖZET
TÜRKİYE’NİN 2009-2014 DÖNEMİNDE YUMUŞAK GÜÇ BAĞLAMINDA
DEĞERLENDİRİLMESİ
Gül Oral
Uluslararası İlişkiler Bölümü, Yüksek Lisans
Danışman: Doç. Dr.Dimitrios Triantaphyllou
Haziran, 2016
Yumuşak güç, Joseph Jr. Nye tarafından geliştirildiği 1990’lardan itibaren uluslararası ilişkiler disiplinin önemli kavramlarından biri olmuştur. Kavram, Amerikan gücünü değerler, kültür ve politikalar gibi yumuşak güç kaynakları bağlamında değerlendirmek için ortaya atılmış olsa da farklı ülkelerde politikacılar ve akademisyenler tarafından yaygın bir şekilde kullanılmaktadır. Yumuşak güç kavramı, AKP döneminde Ahmet Davutoğlu’nun Stratejik Derinlik doktrinine bağlı olarak geliştirilen yeni dış politika anlayışının öne çıkarılmasıyla Türkiye’de de önem kazanmıştır.
Türkiye; kültür, değerler, dış politika ve ekonomik başarısı gibi çeşitli yumuşak güç kaynakları sayesinde bölgesel ve küresel bağlamda aktif bir rol oynayabilecek yükselen
xii
bir yumuşak güç olarak değerlendirilmiştir. Bu tezin amacı da, Davutoğlu’nun Dışişleri Bakanı olarak görev yaptığı 2009-2014 arası döneminde Türkiye’nin yumuşak gücünü, kaynakları ve uygulamalarını temel alarak oluşturulan analitik bir çerçeve bağlamında analiz etmeye çalışmaktır. Bu bağlamda tezin araştırma sorusu da şu şekilde ortaya çıkmaktadır: “Türkiye, 2009-2014 döneminde yumuşak gücünü artırmayı başarabilmiş midir?“ Tezin temel argümanı da şu şekilde ifade edilebilir: Türkiye önemli yumuşak güç kaynaklarına sahip olmasına rağmen, iç ve dış politikada evrensel değerleri savunmadaki başarısızlıklarına bağlı olarak yumuşak gücünün azaldığı görülmektedir.
Anahtar Kelimeler: Joseph Jr. Nye, Yumuşak Güç, Türkiye, Adalet ve Kalkınma
Partisi, Ahmet Davutoğlu, Stratejik Derinlik
xiii
xiv
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to thank my advisor Assoc. Prof. Dr. Dimitrios Triantaphyllou for his valuable assistance and support during my research. He has always encouraged me and helped me while providing invaluable academic assistance and support whenever I needed.
I would also like to thank Prof. Dr. Mitat Çelikpala and Prof. Dr. Gencer Özcan for allocating their time to read and assess my thesis. I am also grateful to my family, my cousin Meral and my friends for their endless support and encouragement for
xv
LIST of TABLES
Table 1 Resources of Soft Power and Practices………...69
xvi
LIST of ABBREVIATIONS
EU European Union
G-20 Group of Twenty
JDP Justice and Development Party (Adalet ve Kalkınma
Partisi)
NSC National Security Council
NATO North Atlantic Treaty Organization
ODA Official Development Assistance
OIC Organization of the Islamic Conference
TESEV Turkish Foundation on Economic and Social Studies
TOBB Turkish Union of Chambers and Commodity Exchanges TÜSİAD Turkish Industrialists and Businessmen’s Association
TIKA Turkish International Cooperation and Development
Agency
TRT Turkish Radio and Television Corporation
UN United Nations
1
CHAPTER 1
Introduction
Soft power has been a prominent concept in the discipline of international relations since it was presented by Joseph S. Nye. The term was used in order to assess the transforming nature of power in the 1990s. Although Nye has coined the term so as to evaluate this transformation in the context of America, it has become a substantial tool for scholars and policy makers around the world for analyzing power relations concerning their countries and their power resources. It has also come into
prominence as a popular concept in Turkey while assessing new foreign policy approach presented by Ahmet Davutoğlu based on his strategic depth doctrine in which geography, culture, and history are considered substantial for forming foreign policy which could enhance Turkey’s influence in regional and international affairs by relying on soft power. The concept has been used in order to present Turkey as a friendly and peaceful country while changing perceptions towards the country by expressing its increasing activism in the regional and global arena as a peaceful transformation and rise. Even though Davutoğlu had been a scholar of international relations, he firstly served as an advisor to the prime minister and then as the
Minister of Foreign Affairs.Accordingly, he became an influential figure in Turkish foreign policy while having opportunities for implementing his doctrine in practices during his tenure of the ministry (2009-2014), so this period will be the main focus of this research. In order to assess Turkey’s soft power during this period, the
2
research will mostly deal with this main question: “Has Turkey achieved to enhance its soft power during the 2009-2014 period as asserted?“ In addition to this main question, there are also some sub-questions needed to be evaluated within this research which could be specified as following:
“Why has soft power been considered as an influential concept in international relations? “
“Why has the concept become important in Turkish foreign policy?” “What are the sources of Turkish soft power? “
“Could Davutoğlu’s ideas be evaluated in the context of soft power? “
“How foreign policy understanding has changed during the JDP period due to new foreign policy principles of Davutoğlu?“
It is essential to acknowledge that ideas of Davutoğlu might be evaluated in different contexts, such as geopolitics due to his emphasis on geography, however in this research, his ideas will be evaluated in terms of soft power, by also taking into account new principles of foreign policy presented by himself. Furthermore, in order to make a coherent analysis, considering events in continuity could be important while evaluating transformation of circumstances. For this reason, while assessing values and policies, some examples which have taken place in the previous period will be mentioned so as to explain their influence on this period.
This research intends to create an analytical framework in order to specify Turkey’s soft power resources by paying attention to opinions of different scholars such as
3
Nye, Davutoğlu and other Turkish scholars such as Kemal Kirişçi and Ziya Öniş, which would be beneficial for making a consistent, relevant, and meaningful analysis while evaluating Turkey’s soft power. In other words, soft power was coined by Nye so as to analyze power in the context of America, which makes it hard to apply the term for evaluating other countries without paying attention to those countries and their diversity in terms of power resources. It has been considered as an important concept for scholars while assessing Turkey with their diverse perspectives paying attention to different sources, which has created ambiguity and difficulty regarding the concept itself. Therefore, it would be substantial to form an analytical framework in the context of Turkey by emphasizing on its own resources so as to examine its soft power. Moreover, this analytical framework could be used for evaluating soft power within different time periods in a more specific and comprehensible way. This research will consist of five chapters and in the first chapter which is also the introduction chapter, the subject and aim of the research will be specified while expressing main and sub-questions. In the second chapter, to have a better
understanding of soft power, firstly the concept of power will be analyzed based on different disciplines such as sociology and international politics and theories of international relations such as realism, neoliberalism, and constructivism. Then, soft and hard power will be assessed briefly by paying attention to ideas of various scholars. Afterwards, soft power will be evaluated by analyzing its resources such as political values, culture, and policies and also its characteristics. Lastly, how the concept has been criticized by different scholars such as Alexander Vuving and Todd Hall will be evaluated.
4
In the third chapter, the concept of soft power will be reviewed while assessing diverse perspectives of Turkish scholars such as Bülent Aras, Kemal Kirişçi, and Ziya Öniş in terms of different sources of soft power. Then, how Nye regards Turkey’s soft power concerning its resources will be viewed briefly. Finally, a special attention will be given to Davutoğlu and his doctrine by taking into account new principles of foreign policy so as to express changing foreign policy approach. After assessing the theoretical aspect of soft power in the second and third chapters, soft power will be reviewed based on practices in the context of various sources of Turkey’s soft power in the fourth chapter. In order to do so, an analytical framework will be presented for displaying on which resources the evaluation will be based and in which type of practices will be included. In addition to the mostly used resources such as policies, values, and culture, economy will also be examined as an important source of soft power by emphasizing Turkey’s economic success in recent years. Moreover, the institutionalization of soft power will be viewed briefly, regarding the establishment of the Office of Public Diplomacy. Lastly, the practical dimension of soft power will be assessed within changes in regional and global contexts.
In the fifth chapter which is also the conclusion chapter, a general assessment of soft power in the 2009-2014 period will be presented based on the analytical framework created in the previous chapter while evaluating results which could be drawn from the research. Further, limitations regarding the research will be mentioned.
In terms of methodology, the research is mainly qualitative, though the quantitative method has also been used while assessing economic growth and changing
5
theoretical analysis of soft power including perspectives of Nye, Davutoğlu, and other scholars and its implementation to Turkey during the 2009-2014 period as the main focus of the research. Mostly secondary resources and to the lesser extent primary resources have been utilized while making research through academic articles, books, books chapters, newspaper articles, reports, online resources, official documents from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and emails.
6
CHAPTER 2
Theoretical Review
Soft power as an influential concept is widely used by scholars and politicians for explaining foreign policy behavior of states while taking into account the changing nature of power in global affairs. Within this research, soft power will be used as the main concept so as to analyze Turkish foreign policy when Ahmet Davutoğlu served as the Minister of Foreign Affairs in the 2009-2014 era of the JDP government. In order to do so, in this chapter, firstly the concept of power will be examined while paying attention to various contexts such as sociology and international politics and also theories of international relations such as realism, neoliberalism, and
constructivism. Secondly, how hard and soft power are evaluated by different scholars will be analyzed briefly by paying a special attention to Joseph Nye’s ideas on power and his concept of soft power. Thirdly, how soft power is defined will be assessed while taking into account its features and resources such as culture, values, and policies. Finally, the critics of soft power will be viewed based on questions such as how and why the concept has been criticized by scholars such as Todd Hall, Lee Gun, and Alexander Vuving.
2.1 Power
Power is one of the most important concepts of international relations while
7
important concept is highly complex and contested due to the diverse understanding of social relations influencing choices and preferences of actors. Therefore, in order to have a better understanding of the concept, it could be helpful to view different conceptions of power.
Max Weber defines power as the chance of an actor to pursue his own aims in spite of any resistance that he will encounter from other actors while evaluating actors within social relations (1978). Michael Barnett and Raymond Duvall also explain power based on social relations while considering it as the production of those relations which impress actors’ capabilities (2005). David D. Raphael pays attention to social circumstances while evaluating power as “the ability to make other people do what one wants them to do“ (1990: 165-166). These three aforementioned
definitions are quite substantial for displaying social aspects of power by focusing on actors within social affairs and circumstances. Further, Hans Morgenthau highlights another aspect of power while examining power firstly in terms of human relations based on control, then extending the concept to politics. He simply expresses power as “man’s control over the minds and actions of other men“ (1948: 13). When those reciprocal relations carry out within the framework of public authority in which the power holder influence people, those power relations acquire political dimension (Morgenthau 1948). Moreover, Karl Deutsch discusses power as “the ability to prevail in conflict and to overcome the obstacles“ in the context of international politics (1967: 236).
In addition to defining power in terms of sociology, social and international politics, power has also been evaluated based on the idea of various faces of power in
8
international relations which are mainly about ordering change, controlling agenda, and forming preferences (Nye 2011a). The first dimension of power was developed by Robert Dahl in the 1950s. He mainly discussed power as relations among various actors such as individuals, groups, nation-states, and governments and defined it by simply analyzing two different actors which could be symbolized as A and B. He assessed power as A’s capability to influence B to “do something that B would not otherwise do“ (1957: 202-203). In accordance with his definition, power was considered as A’s capabilities to achieve its preferred outcomes by causing changes in B’s preferences and behaviors in line with the former’s own aims. In this way, this first dimension was basically related to the decision-making process and its
outcomes.
Peter Bachrach and Morton Baratz put forward a second dimension of power in the 1960s while criticizing the first face of power for taking into account only decision-making process and missing the significance of agenda-setting and framing. That is not to say that decision-making process is not important for examining power relations among various actors. Bachrach and Baratz have also acknowledged the importance of decision-making and have thought that power is exerted when A takes part in the decision-making process by influencing B’s decisions and preferences. However, power is also exerted when A uses its power in order to create and
consolidate political and social values that restrict the range of the political procedure for public significance (Bachrach and Baratz 1962). In other words, it may be
possible for A to form B’s preferences by influencing the latter’s expectations of what is significant and possible to accomplish while using institutions and ideas for
9
framing the agenda (Nye 2011a). If A achieve to do that, B may be hindered to put forward any matters which may not be suitable for A’s preferences with their solutions. In this way, A can control and limit B’s preferences while impressing political procedures, and values so as to restrict decision making to safe issues (Bachrach and Baratz 1962). That is why, not only decision-making process, but also non-decision making process are considered as important in this dimension while paying attention to agenda-setting and framing issues.
Lukes proposed a third dimension of power in the 1970s which exceeded relational and behavioral aspects of power while emphasizing on both how the decision-making process works and how political agenda is controlled by structural factors and also providing a more diverse explanation including both individual and structural factors (2005). This dimension is related to structural existence that explains how actors are influenced and restricted by social, cultural and power relations. The second dimension of power also provides some explanations
concerning structural factors such as politics, and economics while analyzing how some decisions are kept out and how agenda-setting works (Nye 2011a). However, the second dimension is inadequate for comprehending how structural factors (social forces and institutional practices) can impress minds and ideas of people while forming their perceptions, and manipulating their preferences (Lukes 2005).
After briefly evaluating power regarding international politics and social contexts and also different dimensions of power, it is also important to view how power is examined in theories of international relations such as realism, neoliberalism, and constructivism. All these theories acknowledge power as a prominent concept for the
10
discipline, though they have different opinions regarding its significance and mission in the international system (Sancak 2016). For a realist such as Morgenthau, states as the main actors in international relations intend to increase their power so as to ensure their survival which is the main aim of states. The anarchic nature of system leads states to depend on their capacities for their own survival and maximize their power. Therefore, power is considered at the very center of international politics. As expressed by Morgenthau “international politics is a struggle for power. Whatever the ultimate aims of international politics, power is usually the intermediate aim“ (1948: 13). While mentioning intentions of states for increasing their power, realists have assumed power as an entity mostly in terms of tangible resources such as military and economic capabilities, though they have acknowledged the existence of other resources (Mattern 2009; Sancak 2016). For instance, when Morgenthau assesses power related to national resources, he pays attention to both tangible elements such as geography, natural resources, industrial capacity, military preparedness, population, and intangible elements such as national character, and national morale, and the quality of diplomacy (1948). In this way, it could be said that realist presumptions are closed to the first dimension of power based on their similar perception of power in behavioralist and materialist terms (Mattern 2008). Neoliberalists also acknowledge power as a significant concept, though they have not positioned power at the center of their theories as realists had done. They also
assume states as the most prominent actors while also paying attention to non-state actors as other actors involving in global affairs. They focus on interdependence by taking into account increasing dependence of states and non-state actors and also
11
believe that states can cooperate instead of acting alone so as to accomplish their common interests such as global welfare and security through international institutions (Baylis, Smith and Owens 2011). In other words, institutions are endorsed as tools which could accomplish cooperation among actors in the global order (Liberfeld 2005; Baylis, Smith and Owens 2011). Accordingly, power is regarded by Robert Keohane and Joseph Nye concerning the notion of institutions and interdependence in international politics which displays circumstances
symbolized by mutual dependence of different actors. In order to comprehend the role of power in the context of interdependence, they have made a distinction between vulnerability and sensitivity. Sensitivity interdependence is connected to responses of other actors and is established by interactions within a structure of policies. Vulnerability is related to a state’s accountability to tolerate costs which are charged by external circumstances due to changing policies. Whereas policy changes influence sensitivity dependence in short terms, it impresses vulnerability
dependence in longer terms due to the costliness of adaptation to altered
circumstances. Therefore, vulnerability is quite substantial so as to grasp the political formation of relations based on interdependence while paying attention to important questions such as who is forming the rules and setting the agenda (Keohane and Nye 2011). In this way, the second and third face of power could be substantial so as to understand power relations in an era of interdependence with its emphasis on agenda-setting, framing, and structural factors.
Whereas realists assume power as the main interest of states while evaluating interests in a more objective and tangible context, constructivists evaluate power
12
within a more subjective and intangible understanding by viewing interests as unfixed and changeable. In order to understand interests of various actors, it is noteworthy to pay attention to their social environment, their historical experiences and also their identities which impress their preferences and perceptions (Conteh-Morgan 2005; Wendt 1992). In other words, for constructivists, it is essential to pay attention to actors’ interests, identities, preferences, and also perceptions so as to comprehend the concept of power. Identities and interests are shaped by social contexts throughout specific historical processes and can change over time. They also express that a state’s intention of enhancing its power for its own interest may not always produce conflict as realists have advocated, but can even sustain
cooperation among different states (Wendt 1992). In this way, the third face of power could provide substantial explanations with its emphasize on how social factors can influence actors by shaping their preferences and perceptions for constructivism. Power is also examined in terms of resource power and behavioral power. Resource power is stated by Keohane and Nye as the possession of particular sources such as military forces, economic size, natural resources, territory, and population which are considered as the capability to achieve the preferred outcomes. In behavioral terms, power could be expressed as the capability to acquire intended outcomes. Behavioral power could be separated into two different categories as hard and soft power
(Keohane and Nye 2011). In order to impress the behavior of others, states can rely on its economic and military power as its use of hard power or soft power based on various resources and behaviors employed through their policies. Hard power is defined by Keohane and Nye as “the ability to get others to do what they otherwise
13
would not do through threat of punishment or promise of reward.“ (2011: 216) Otherwise, soft power is described as the capability to “get desired outcomes because others want what you want; it is the ability to achieve desired outcomes through attraction rather than coercion“ (Keohane and Nye 2011: 216). States can rely on its military power due to coercion, protection, and deterrence by using force and
threating others through war, alliance and coercive diplomacy or its economic power due to inducement and coercion while imposing sanctions and making payments through diverse government policies such as bribes and aids. States can also depend on its capacity for agenda setting and attractiveness by encouraging institutions, values, cultures, and policies through bilateral and multilateral and also public diplomacy in order to form the preferences of other actors so as to acquire preferred outcomes (Keohane and Nye 2011; Nye 2004a). In this way, the concept of soft power provides a new understanding in terms of power which was evaluated mainly based on military capacity and economic success for a long time. Further, the concept displays another dimension of power while emphasizing different power behaviors other than coercion, threat, and inducement that could be used by states to get what they want (Sancak 2016).
As claimed by Nye and Welch, this behavioral definition of power might be substantial for historians and analysts who intend to reconstruct the past, though policy makers and politicians usually prefer the definition of power as the possession of sources for practical reasons such as their intentions of impressing other actors and making predictions about the future so as to lead their actions. Moreover, the
14
resources which also makes the description more predictable, measurable, and perceptible (Nye and Welch 2011). However, definitions may have problems in practice and possession of best sources may not always produce the desired
outcomes for an actor. For instance, having the best military capacity may not always cause achieving military victory. While evaluating power in terms of resources, it is also substantial to know which resources are more convenient in specific
circumstances so as to accomplish preferred outcomes. Power conversion which means the ability to transform potential power assessed by resources into realized power assessed by transformed behaviors of other actors is also another problem that emerges when power is defined concerning possession of particular resources (Nye 1990; 2011a).
After assessing power briefly based on different conceptions, it is essential to explore how hard and soft power have been analyzed by scholars while paying a special attention to Nye and his concept of soft power.
2.2 Hard Power and Soft Power
Hard power and soft power have been evaluated as two important concepts by Keohane and Nye while analyzing power in terms of behavioral power (2011). Hard power has been widely used while explaining states’ reliance on military and
economic power so as to influence other actors by means of various behaviors such as coercion, inducement, and command. Soft power as a new concept coined by Nye has provided a new perspective while highlighting another dimension of power by pointing out diverse behaviors such as attraction and agenda-setting.
15
The concept was developed by Joseph S. Nye in order to express Nye’s different opinion about changing nature of power in his well-known book Bound to Lead: The Changing Nature of American Power in 1990. Contrary to the common assumption of American declinism in the academia and public arena at the end of the 1980s which means that the enhancing power of Japan and European countries tested American power and also its status as the global leader, he was confident in American power not only in its form as hard command power but also in its co-optive or soft power while analyzing those countries (Nye 1990a; 1990b).
Nye has further developed the concept especially in his seminal book Soft Power: The Means to Success in World Politics in order to clarify it with more details for avoiding any misunderstandings in its common usage. He has examined soft power behaviors and its resources broadly while taking into account not only states but also non-state actors such as the UN and the AI Qaeda. He has also looked at the
relationship between soft power and American foreign policy while paying special attention to the Iraq War (2003) and the unilateralist approach of the Bush
Administration before and after the war as the major cause of decreasing American soft power. Nye has also emphasized the significance of soft power in his influential book The Paradox of American Power while criticizing that unilateralist approach and the risk of rising triumphalism in America in the beginning of the 21st century. He has assumed that values, cultures and policies, which support and promote democracy and human rights at domestic and international level (while listening to others’opinions) could increase soft power of a country. On the other hand acting in a
16
unilateralist way while taking into account only national benefits and not listening to others could weaken the soft power (Nye 2002a; 2004a).
Nye has continued to use the concept of soft power as a substantial tool for analyzing the evolving power relations in the 21st century while paying attention to states and non-state actors in his following books such as The Future of Power and Is the American Century Over?. When he refers to the term, he mostly emphasizes the importance of multilateralism while considering the concept in the context of a non-zero sum game which means an actor’s gain does not always cause other actor’s loss and global affairs could be a win-win situation for both actors. The success of soft power can be beneficial for all countries if countries can achieve working together especially on transnational issues such as international crime, climate change, the spread of infectious diseases and terrorism. Furthermore, he has even used the concepts of soft and hard power in order to evaluate the relationship between power and leadership in his book called The Powers to Lead (Nye 2008a; 2011a; 2015).
The concept of soft power has been assessed as an important concept with its
emphasize on attraction and persuasion while also paying attention to cooperation so as to solve common problems. However, the concept has been criticized as being inadequate, vague, and inefficient by many scholars, and decision-makers in various ways. For instance, Niall Ferguson has regarded it as an ineffective concept for acquiring preferred outcomes while assessing soft power in terms of commercial and cultural products. On the other hand, he assumes that hard power is more influential for achieving actors’ aims while defining power in the context of material sources such as military capabilities (2009). Further, the concept with its emphasize on
17
American power is viewed by Lee Geun as a significant tool to sustain and enhance American leadership position in global affairs while attracting others in order to maintain its hegemonic position (2009). As expressed by Hall, the concept is widely applied without criticizing this aspect so as to advocate specific values and policies of various states (2010). Moreover, as criticized by Bilgin and Eliş, values mainly representing American way of life are considered and encouraged as universal values without giving any explanations why and how those values have become universal (2008). Lastly, Alexander Vuving has made a significant contribution while analyzing the concept by making a distinction between power resources and power currencies which are mainly related to power resources. Those currencies are specified as beauty, benignity, and brilliance which are about actors’ values, aims, and visions, actors’ relations with others and actors’ connections with their works. Vuving has expressed that those currencies produce soft power through inspiration, sympathy, appreciation, and admiration (2009).
After evaluating hard and soft power briefly, now it is important to look at how soft power is defined and differentiated by Joseph Nye from hard power based on their qualities and resources which are used so as to wield the soft power of a country in a more detailed way for understanding its significance.
2.2.2 Soft Power
Soft power can be defined an actor’s capability to influence other actors for acquiring desired outcomes through attraction rather than coercion and payments. A state may acquire its desired outcomes in global affairs if others would like to follow it by imitating its example, aspiring its high standard of openness and wealth, and
18
appreciating its values. In this way, soft power can depend on attraction and also agenda setting while supporting resources of soft power such as culture, policies, values, and institutions for influencing other actors (Nye 2004a).
Soft power depends on an actor’s capability to form preferences of others through influence, persuasion, and attraction. However, soft power can not be solely defined as influence that can also emerge as a result of hard power. Although persuasion is significant for exerting soft power by moving other actors with ideas, it is more than persuasion. It is also about attraction which frequently lead to compliance by
impressing preferences of others. As claimed by Nye, soft power is more likely to be used by democratic countries which rest on attraction to get what they want. Further, democratic countries have perceived power as less compelling and tangible than it was before. That is why, they are more likely to depend on soft power resources for influencing other actors. For instance, if a leader with an attractive personality pursues values and policies which are considered as legitimate and moral by others, it will cost less to form preferences of other actors (Nye 2004a).
However, all countries in the world are not democratic which restrains the global transformation of power while making not only soft power but also hard power as still relevant in current global affairs. Nye explains the distribution of power by comparing it to a three-dimensional chess game which includes political-military matters on the top, economic issues in the middle and transnational matters on the bottom level. Hard power is quite relevant for impressing actions of others so as to get preferred outcomes in all those issues. However, soft power is also quite essential for solving transnational matters such as terrorism and international crimes which
19
necessitate cooperation and collective action for their resolutions (Nye 2004a; 2011a).
Hard and soft power are actually connected to each other with their similar aims of influencing others, but they are also different because of the qualities of their
resources as tangible or intangible and the nature of the behavior whether it is related to co-optive or command power. While command power can be defined as the capability of changing other actors’ behaviors by using hard power resources, co-optive power can be described as the capability of forming others’ preferences by means of soft power resources. Therefore, whereas command power mainly relies on tangible resources such as payments, threats, bribes, and sanctions, co-optive power is more attached to intangible resources such as values, policies, and cultures for influencing preferences of others and attracting them. The correlation between types of power and resources may not always be perfect yet. Hard power resources such as a successful economy or a well-run military could be a source of appeal and
reputation and also produce soft power behavior while attracting others to follow their effective examples. Moreover, if a state experiences crises regarding its
economy and military, it can lose its hard power resources and also its attractiveness as a soft power while losing some of its capability to set the global agenda. It is also noteworthy to highlight that soft power does not mainly rely on hard power, though hard power could be significant for exerting soft power (Nye 1990a; 2004a).
Nye indicates soft power which could be used for good or bad aims as a descriptive concept, but not as a normative one. He also evaluates soft power as an attractive power in terms of behavior and as resources which could exert attraction in terms of
20
resources. Therefore, soft power is considered as the capacity to acquire desired outcomes through attraction rather than inducements and threats. It emerges from the desirability of a country’s values, culture, ideas and policies and also from the
capability of agenda-setting while manipulating the agenda of political options and shaping the preferences of others by representing them as realistic or unrealistic. It is also notable to mention that soft power is dependent on the context as the other kinds of power and accordingly changes within time and space. Soft power resources such as freedom may be perceived as attractive in one place, but may be considered as repulsive in another. So it is not just about having the resources, but also how those resources as perceived by receivers under which conditions matters (Nye 2004a; 2007b).
2.2.3 Sources of Soft Power
Nye points out that the soft power of a country mainly arises from three resources: “its culture (in places where it is attractive to others), its political values (when it lives up to them at home and abroad), and its foreign policies (when they are seen as legitimate and having moral authority) “ (2004a: 11). Culture is described as “the set of values and practices that create meaning for a society“ (Nye 2004a: 11). It is usually divided into two categories as popular culture expressing mass entertainment and high culture regarding education, literature, and art. Popular culture produces soft power behavior, but it would be a mistake to perceive soft power as the consequences of popular culture simply (Nye 2004a). As soft power expressed by Niall Ferguson and Josef Joffe mainly as cultural power, it is considered that the relations between culture and attraction might be imperfect and even produce
21
repulsion instead of attraction (2009; 2006). It is also important to acknowledge that culture may not attract all people in similar ways and may not produce attraction in desired ways, however, culture is one of the resources for wielding soft power. If we only focus on this resource, we are likely to fail to comprehend the concept as a whole.
Values as one of the sources of soft power are the ones proclaimed in domestic and foreign policies of a state. States would like to sustain their own benefits, but the main question is which power sources will be used when states would like to sustain their interests through their policies. Policies as the other source of soft power are related to strategies on which governments describe their aims and intend to sustain them. If they describe their policies narrowly based on their national interests and maintain those kinds of policies, they would seem less attractive compared to states whose policies are more inclusive (Nye 2004a).
If a country’s culture embraces universal values and its policies support those values while taking into account interests of others, it enhances the possibility of achieving the preferred outcomes for commitment and attraction that it builds. However promoting narrow-minded values and considering solely national interests while not paying attention to universal values could diminish the probability of acquiring the desired outcomes (Nye 2004a).
Government policies which have been pursued in the national and international level could be an important source of soft power. If a country is able to encourage
implementing universally shared values such as democracy, freedom, and human rights in its domestic and foreign policy by working with others in international
22
institutions, it will advance its soft power while influencing the others. Further, if a country can form international institutions consistent with its values, it can also wield its soft power and enhance its legitimacy in the eyes of other countries which means it can experience less hostile attitudes moving towards achieving its aims. For instance, the US which created institutions leading the global economy as the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Trade Organization consistent with its liberal ideology and values can increase its soft power while creating spaces for states in order to work together for mutual interests such as economic stability and development. Moreover, transnational issues such as climate change or terrorism display the necessity of working with others so as to resolve common problems. Even though those issues have domestic origins, they pass international borders which make it hard for states to solve them alone and require multilateral actions (Nye 1990b; 2002a; 2004a).
Credibility is also essential for attracting others, but the involvement of a government in the process could be perceived as propaganda while decreasing its credibility and also its appeal. It is also essential to underline that considering government as the primary mechanism of soft power could be problematic yet. Many of soft power resources are not related to a government as hard power resources are. For instance, military forces are absolutely governmental and are exposed to government control. Whereas the implementation of foreign policy and values such as human rights and democracy is more open to government control, popular culture is more independent which makes it difficult to control and manipulate for the government. It is also noteworthy to mention that soft power is considered as more preferable for its
23
impression of being less risky, though it is easier to lose and difficult to reestablish. Moreover, soft power could need a longer time so as to provide intended outcomes for a government which needs to pay attention not only to other states, but also to non-state actors as multinational companies, transnational terrorist organizations, and institutions in order to advance its soft power (Nye 2002a; 2004a; 2011a).
After evaluating sources of soft power, it is also essential to mention which measures could be assessed as potential attraction so as to exert soft power. According to Nye, foreign immigrants, international students, foreign scholars, book sales and music sales, Nobel prize winners, popular sports, asylum applications, the number of Internet hosts could be considered as measures of potential attraction. However, it should be highlighted that those potential measures may not always actualize their potential and produce the desired results (2004a).
2.2.4 The Critiques of Soft Power
The concept of soft power introduced by Joseph Nye has been extensively used by not only academicians but also political leaders. It has been considered as a
substantial term especially for leading human rights efforts and diplomatic initiatives by focusing on universal values such as human rights and promoting the necessity of acting together so as to solve transnational problems while taking into account others. The term also underlines the importance of persuasion and attraction instead of coercion and payments while paying attention to non-coercive ways for appealing others such as culture, values, and policies. Nonetheless, soft power has been widely criticized because of its lack of well-developed theoretical explanation and its ambiguity (Geun 2009; Kudryavtsev 2014; Vuving 2009; Beng 2008). It has been
24
also reviewed as being ineffective by Niall Ferguson. He assumes soft power mostly connected to cultural and commercial goods and considers that loving cultural products created by America does not make people more attracted to America directly. For that reason, he mainly defines power regarding material sources such as money and guns and perceives hard power more effective to achieve preferred outcomes by making the US as the greatest power (Ferguson 2009).
Nye expresses various factors such as cultural programs, educational exchange programs, and technology in order to wield soft power while increasing the attractiveness of a country, however, considering those different factors under the only category of “attractiveness“ could be problematic while underestimating their differences (Kudryavtsev 2014). Further, as indicated by Pınar Bilgin and Berivan Eliş, Nye reflects attraction as pre-given while focusing on how to increase it instead of understanding the historical context and the social interaction in which it occurs. As he also encourages universal values, he fails to explain some questions such as how those values are considered as universal and based on which circumstances (Bilgin and Eliş 2008).
The concept of soft power is quite substantial for promoting multilateralism and diplomacy while supporting specific values which promote liberal American way of life. Whilst Nye talks about the significance of persuasion and attraction, he mostly refers to the US as the favorable example owing to its values and culture (Beng 2008). However, the term has been widely used not only in America but also in Europe and Asia and academicians and politicians who have adopted the term have presented their cultures, policies and values as more attractive instead of questioning
25
the term in itself. That is why, soft power has been utilized as a way to justify particular policies and values by politicians (Hall 2010). Further, it gives more opportunities for middle powers which do not intend to or do not have the capacity to increase their hard power resources in order to compete with the US such as Japan and Canada for expanding their foreign policies through soft power resources (Geun 2009).
Nye’s opinions on soft power have also been criticized by Lee Geun for mostly concerning the essence of power instead of the power sources. Although Nye mentions culture, values, and policies as resources of co-optive power, he mainly deals with the essence of power. For instance, even though the military is a source of hard power, it can produce attractiveness and soft power. If the nature of the power is attractive and co-optive, it turns into soft power. On the other hand, Geun pays more attention to soft power resources for producing soft power, not to the essence of power. As stated by him, whenever soft power resources are utilized in order to attract others, the result is soft power. Soft power could be also coercive and co-optive in its nature yet (Geun 2009).
Evaluating soft power in terms of resources makes power measurable and tangible (Vuving 2009; Nye 2008a). Power resources are important so as to exert power, though power is not same as its resources. As mentioned above, hard power resources such as military not only produce hard power, but can also produce soft power. In order to clear the confusion emerged as a result of considering power as resources, Vuving makes a differentiation between power currencies and power
26
resources. Power currencies which are beauty, benignity, and brilliance as defined by Vuving exert soft power and usually belong to power resources (2009).
As claimed by Vuving, beauty is related to the actors’ connection with visions, values, aims, and reasons and creates soft power thanks to inspiration. If actors share similar values, aims, and visions, they consider each other in positive ways and intend to act together so as to sustain their shared aims and values. Benignity is connected to the actors’ relations with others, especially with the client which is used by Vuving in order to express the willingness of the client in the soft power
processes and leads to soft power owing to the creation of sympathy and
appreciation. While benignity represents kind and peaceful purposes of the agents, it increases the possibility of cooperation by attracting the others. Governments can advance their benignity if they listen to others and increase their dialogues with others by also supporting peace. Diplomatic assistance, economic aid, and
humanitarian support are the most familiar ways of promoting benignity. Moreover, the governance of foreign policy via international institutions is another way to exert soft power by creating an area for taking collective steps based on shared values and aims and the necessity of following international norms and paying attention to interests of others. Brilliance is about the actors’ connection with their works and creates soft power through admiration. It displays itself in different shapes such as a successful economy, a powerful military or a peaceful society by inspiring others to imitate some or all of the policies, values, exercises and ideologies of successful states. Vuving also evaluates that educational exchange programs, cultural events, promotion of culture, and language are important for making the first prominent
27
move so as to support understanding and encouraging positive images of a country, though he does not think that those activities generate soft power behavior frankly (2009).
After looking at the theory of soft power presented by Nye and critics made by scholars such as Vuving, Hall, and Bilgin, theoretical aspect of soft power in Turkish foreign policy will be analyzed in the next chapter. In order to do so, how Turkish scholars have perceived the term and made contributions will be evaluated. After that Ahmet Davutoğlu and his strategic depth Doctrine will be assessed.
28
CHAPTER 3
Soft Power in Turkish Foreign Policy
Soft power has been an important concept for scholars such as Bülent Aras, Kemal Kirişçi, Ziya Öniş, and Ahmet Davutoğlu directly or indirectly whilst arguing Turkish foreign policy during the JDP government. In order to understand how this concept has been examined based on practices of soft power, firstly it is essential to mention how Nye evaluates Turkey’s soft power based on its resources. Then, it is important to review how these scholars have assessed the concept concerning various resources such as values, policies, and culture. Lastly, how Davutoğlu views the concept related to the strategic depth doctrine will be mentioned by paying attention to his new principles of foreign policy such as the zero-problems with neighbors so as to highlight the changing nature of foreign policy understanding.
3.1 Theoretical Discussion
Soft power could be considered as a substantial concept for Bülent Aras who has written many articles on Turkey’s foreign policy, Turkey’s mediation and peace-building efforts in the Balkans and in the Middle East and also Ahmet Davutoğlu’s new foreign policy understanding. He has applied this concept in order to explain changing Turkish foreign policy and its practices in diverse regions during the JDP government. He assesses that Turkish foreign policy has been conducted with a new
29
understanding based on soft power together with a more constructive, active and peace-oriented manner towards its neighbors by taking into account international values and legitimacy instead of the former understanding depending on mere security. Further, he considers Turkey as a soft power concerning its social,
economic, and political abilities and its influence on the ground (Aras 2008; 2009b; 2009c; 2012).
Tarık Oğuzlu has also analyzed Turkey’s new foreign policy approach based on soft power regarding its relations with the West within changing historical context while paying attention to new principles of foreign policy such as zero-problems with neighbors. He has reviewed new foreign policy approach as dynamic and visionary especially towards the Middle East compared to the old one which was mainly Western-oriented and was based on security while perceiving the Middle East as a threat to its security and to its Western identity. Moreover, he has also discussed whether Turkey could be a potential model for the Middle Eastern countries, regarding the Arab uprisings which started in late 2010 in Tunisia and spread to the other Arabic states such as Egypt, Libya, Yemen, and Syria. According to Oğuzlu, the uprisings displayed discontent of people regarding economic, social, and
economic issues of the region and their need for liberalization and democratization. In this way, Turkey has been considered as a potential model which has synthesized democracy, modernism, and secularism while having a largely Muslim population for those countries which have intended to maintain their cultural and religious values, though they would like to accomplish political, economic, and social changes (Oğuzlu 2007; 2011b; 2012b; 2014).
30
Kemal Kirişçi has discussed how Turkey’s image has transformed from being a country which mainly relies on security to a country intending to become a soft power while emphasizing on the concept of the trading state in order to explain how economic relations and Turkey’s increasing involvement in the region has shaped new foreign policy understanding. He has reviewed how foreign policy approach has changed with the new government, owing to the principles of Ahmet Davutoğlu, which encourage better relations with neighbors, economic integration, mediation, and diplomacy. While analyzing changing Turkish foreign policy under the JDP government, he also acknowledges that there had been some changes implemented by former governments in the 1980s and the 1990s, such as improving economic relations with neighbors without much effect on foreign policy (Kirişçi 2009, 2011, 2012).
Ziya Öniş has analyzed Turkey’s new active foreign policy during the JDP period regarding the political and economic reforms sustained for the EU membership, while also discussing how the economic and political achievements of the former governments created opportunities for pursuing an active foreign policy and how economic instability restricted the previous governments to maintain that policy. He views Turkey as a benign regional power which can play a constructive role in various regions by deploying soft power resources effectively while evaluating increasing relations with neighbor countries due to improving political, economic and trade links (Öniş 2003; 2009; Öniş and Kutlay 2013).
Even though Şaban Kardaş does not mainly use the concept of soft power, he needs to be mentioned regarding his significant analysis of Turkish foreign policy in the
31
Middle East and Turkey’s response to the Arab uprisings based on its support for liberal values such as democracy and human rights. He mostly uses the concept of regional power, while taking into account Turkey’s attempts for forming a regional order and also for its intention of initiating a course of regional integration in the Middle East. He evaluates Turkey’s democratization experience and the new
economic and political reforms initiated by the new government which has enhanced Turkey’s image as a source of inspiration, regarding Turkey’s increasing regional involvement. Further, he emphasizes the proactive feature of foreign policy while explaining Turkey’s increasing involvement in regional and global issues by employing diverse liberal tools in the Middle East such as mediation, diplomacy, economic interdependence, and soft power (Kardaş 2010; 2012a; 2012b; 2013). Soft power could be also assumed as a prominent concept for İbrahim Kalın1, who has been an influential figure since 2009, firstly as a senior advisor to the prime minister and the director of public diplomacy and then as the deputy undersecretary. Therefore, in order to understand how Turkish foreign policy transformed during the JDP period and how soft power applied through public diplomacy so as to achieve transformation, Kalın will be mentioned briefly taking into account his scholarly articles and newspapers articles. He emphasizes the transformation of foreign policy by expressing three principles, such as economic improvement, the balance between security and freedom, and political and economic justice. Turkey needs to advance its soft power so as to become a regional power and form a regional order based on freedom and security while enhancing its influence in the international arena.
32
Further, he considers that Turkey needs to display its political legitimacy for highlighting its democratic credentials which are the main features of Turkey’s soft power (Kalın 2011a; 2011b).
Ahmet Davutoğlu firstly as a scholar of international relations and then as an advisor to the prime minister and a foreign minister has been a prominent figure in Turkish foreign policy. He has developed the theory of strategic depth while analyzing Turkey’s relations with its surrounding regions regarding its geographical and historical depth. He has also written about new foreign policy vision and new principles of foreign policy such as the balance between security and democracy, zero problem with neighbors, pro-active and pre-emptive foreign policy, rhythmic diplomacy, and maintaining a multidimensional foreign policy. He advocates that Turkey needs to pursue an active and multidimensional foreign policy approach by improving its relations with its neighbors, which could expand its soft power (Davutoğlu 2008; 2010; 2012b).
3.2 Different Perspectives about the Concept of Soft Power in Turkish Foreign Policy
Soft power is the ability to acquire the desired outcomes by relying on attraction rather than coercion and inducement. As mentioned by Nye, countries can depend on their various resources such as cultures, values, and policies so as to exert their soft power through attraction. Turkey has been analyzed concerning its resources and its use of soft power by some scholars and politicians. Before evaluating how soft power has been assessed within Turkey, it is essential to mention how Nye expresses Turkish soft power regarding its resources. According to Nye (2016), Turkey has a
33
significant amount of soft power depending on its resources such as its traditional culture and its inheritance as a Muslim country which has consolidated Islam with democracy and human rights. In this way, Turkey could be considered as a soft power regarding its culture, values, and policies which are consistent with liberal values such as human rights and democracy.
Bülent Aras also acknowledges Turkey as a rising soft power concerning its economic, political and social capabilities and its effectiveness on the ground. Turkey has intended to advance its relations with its neighbors and achieve regional cooperation in the Balkans, in the Middle East and also in the Caucasus by
improving economic, diplomatic and political relations. As explained by Aras, Turkish foreign policy which aims at fostering cooperation and integration among countries in the region rests on four principles: “high-level political dialogue, economic interdependence, promoting multicultural co-existence, and an inclusive understanding of security“ (2012:3). Turkey has tried to encourage political and strategic dialogue among its neighbors and create economic interdependence by abolishing visa requirements for its neighbors and establishing a free-trade zone with them. Furthermore, multicultural and multi-religious co-existence have been
highlighted as two prominent social aspects of cooperation and advocated so as to achieve regional cooperation. The formation of common security environment including all actors based on equality has been also encouraged for establishing a peaceful and stable regional order (Aras and Akarçeşme 2011).
As argued by Aras, Turkey’s rising soft power needs to be evaluated based on regional circumstances while taking into account its peacemaking efforts through
34
diplomacy. Turkey has maintained an active foreign policy so as to facilitate solving long-standing problems by acting as a mediator and showing accomplishments on the ground in the course of crisis such as the Gaza crisis and the Russia-Georgia crisis. Turkey’s role as a mediator in regional problems is also considerable for presenting an alternative voice from the region itself. That is why; Turkey has advanced its appeal not only in the West and in the US, but also in its surrounding regions by putting regional problems forward to the international area (Aras 2009a; 2009b; 2009c; 2012).
As claimed by Aras, three causes could be mentioned for considering Turkey as a rising soft power. The first cause is connected to Turkey’s democratization, its economic success and stability, its cultural, political and social accomplishments that have enhanced Turkey’s appeal. The second cause is related to its capacity for sustaining an active foreign policy aiming at resolving regional issues by paying attention to regional concerns and international reliability, which enhances its reputation while gaining hearts and minds of people of the region. The third and last cause is about the diplomacy which has been pursued in a moderate and cautious way by involving all connected actors to the process in order to resolve problems and start initiatives without taking sides in any regional coalitions (Aras 2009a). Aras evaluates Turkey’s soft power in a more broad perspective while paying attention not only to values and foreign policies which promote cooperation, dialogue and use of diplomacy for creating a more peaceful region, but also to culture in terms of
multicultural co-existence and economic achievements which can enhance Turkey’s appeal by improving its image and attracting other actors.
35
Oğuzlu has also analyzed new foreign policy approach which promotes economic integration while relying on diplomacy and mediation attempts to solve regional disputes for establishing a new regional order. Owing to this new approach, Turkey has changed its perception towards the Middle East positively and regarded the region in a different perspective while enhancing its relations with its neighbors in order to enhance its credibility and its reputation for the Western countries and also for the Middle Eastern countries. Turkey has started to transform gradually from a hard power depending on its military capabilities to a trading state which relies on soft power resources. In this way, Turkey has intended to advance not only its economic, social and political relations with its neighbors but also its cultural appeal in the region by encouraging liberal and democratic values. A dynamic foreign policy has been pursued by the new government taking into account common historical and cultural ties with the people of the region in order to create a peaceful and stable regional order (Oğuzlu 2007; 2010; 2012a; 2014).
Oğuzlu also evaluates the new foreign policy approach in the context of Europeanization process. The EU is mainly viewed as a civilian power which depends on multilateralism, diplomacy, and international law to be seen legitimate and intends to resolve conflicts in peaceful ways. The new government has preferred a cooperative and multilateral foreign policy approach which has increased Turkey’s soft power. Moreover, with the de-securitization process, many issues has been interpreted in terms of politics as an alternative to the former understanding based on security while encouraging negotiation and consensus-building and advancing civilian primacy during the procedure of conflict resolution. However, he claims that
36
domestic problems which cause chaos and instability in the country could damage Turkey’s identity as a soft power by diminishing its attractive image and legitimacy in the eyes of its neighbors. Further, the idea of soft power could be challenged due to the changing security environments in the Black Sea and also in the Middle East which show that realpolitik might be coming back (Oğuzlu 2007; 2010; 2014). While Oğuzlu regards Turkey as a soft power concerning its culture, history, values, and policies which encouragse the use of diplomacy, mediation efforts and
multilateralism. He also assesses Turkey as a model country for the Middle Eastern countries. He considers that the uprisings in the Arab world have highlighted
dissatisfaction of people concerning political, social and economic problems such as corruption, unemployment, authoritarian governments of the region and their
increasing demands for democratization and liberalization. Turkey which
successfully consolidates democracy and Islam as a secular state could be considered as a model for the countries of the region which have aimed at obtaining
democratization and economic development while protecting their religious and cultural values in the meantime. His expression of the model country also displays some similarities with Nye’s ideas on Turkey’s soft power taking into account their emphasizes on Turkey’s consolidation of democracy and Islam as a secular state. According to Oğuzlu, Turkey’s relations with the West, especially with the EU and NATO and its rising soft power in the Middle East in recent years owing to its democratic achievements, its economic growth and its diplomatic efforts are also substantial for evaluating Turkey as a model country. It is also essential to emphasize that although the idea of the model country is important at a theoretical level, it may
37
not produce similar outcomes in practice in different countries due to their diverse features (Oğuzlu 2011b; 2013a).
Şaban Kardaş also highlights that Turkey has improved its image in the region and also in the global arena owing to new foreign policy approach applied by the JDP government since 2002, when they first came to power. Turkey has enhanced its relations with its neighbors such as Iraq and Armenia so as to resolve bilateral problems and has also acted as a mediator to solve regional problems through diplomacy between various countries such as Russia and Georgia and also Bosnia-Herzegovina, Croatia, and Serbia. With the purpose of forming a peaceful order in the region, economic cooperation and integration have been promoted extensively through such implementations as the abolishment of visa requirement, the
establishment of a free trade zone, and the formation of strategic cooperation councils with neighbors such as Syria for accomplishing political rapprochement. Moreover, Turkey has opened to new regions such as Africa, East Asia, and Latin America by developing new political, social and economic relations with countries of those regions (Kardaş 2012a; 2012b).
Kemal Kirişçi evaluates changing foreign policy understanding from a different perspective while emphasizing Turkey’s economic success in order to understand the promotion of democratic values and the use of soft power. He also acknowledges that domestic developments such as the rise of a new political elite, with a new agenda under the new JDP government (who supports the EU's political and economic reforms and a more active foreign policy approach by developing closer economic ties with regional countries) have been prominent for explaining changing
